Sedition! I think McCabe just defined the word today. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi4l9z9u8TgAhVAwMQHHWfqB5wQFjALegQIBBAB&url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/andrew-mccabe-60-minutes-possible-inappropriate-relationship-between-trump-russia-prompted-probe/&usg=AOvVaw2Dpp58oTfIpsGW7b93WS4u https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1096252829013020673.htmlhttps://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1096252829013020673.html
Whoa whoa whoa bud....they were wondering about some heavy shit. "So all those same sorts of facts cause us to wonder, is there an inappropriate relationship, a connection between this president and our most fearsome enemy, the government of Russia?" . . . . If you take this wondering and put it with "russia please gimme Hillary's emails" what they really should have done is pulled on Trump's face to see if it is really Putin wearing a Trump mask..Now I'M wondering
Naw! That is the SS Muller taking on excessive ballast. By the time he writes his report. the main player will have blown their cover.
I am not. But I did wonder the day when Comey said Trump was under investigation, as far back as when he was the candidate. Who the hell authorized and investigation into a Presidential candidate? I don't think that has ever happened before. I figured it had to be Obama, but I just don't think he is really that dumb. But it appears these buggers at the FBI and Justice sure as hell are! The big nitwits. They got in a circle and drew lots to see whom would authorize the coup. And off they went. Twenty five years each should be about right.
I don't think that actually happened. In fact, according to Trump, Comey told him 3 times that he was not the subject of the investigation. You don't recall anything about an investigation into Hillary? Look up the word coup and get back to us. Actually, given the thread title, you should also look up sedition. barfo
Sorry bubs, but I didn't see where it said he plead guilty to anything. Can you highlight that part so I can see it.
Speaking of arrogant and clueless, what about that guy you voted for that declares a state of emergency and then claims he didn't need to do it, but wanted to get it done quicker. WTF kind of emergency is that? Oh, and the caper is, he then heads out to Mar Lago during a state of emergency.
I mean if your going to take something someone said and call them guilty of anything, just look at how many times Trump and seemingly everyone in his cabinet have obstructed justice, lied to congress and other authorities, and just strait up admitting to illegal or very unethical things.
Who’s lying McCabe or Rosenstien? Besides Trump and other Republicans do you realize how many dems’s in high places have lied. There Are a whole bunch that have lied under oath and the one that’s bothered me for sometime is the IRS putang Lois Lerner.
He certainly comes across to me as being very believable. Then, what he says has the ring of truth to it. When Rosenstein allegidly floated the idea of wearing a wire when he met with Trump in an investigation into possibly impeaching the President, that also seemed to be true. Naturally Rosenstein would deny it or he'd be fired right now and it's vitally important that he retain his position within the Justice Department.
Why do either of them have to be lying? They only disagree about how seriously Rosenstein meant it when he asked about wearing a wire. Yes. So what? This isn't a partisan issue. If someone does crimes, they should do the time, no matter what party they belong to. putang? Anyway, I certainly can't say whether justice was done in that case, but here's the conclusion, courtesy of Wikipedia: Note that the investigation here lasted 2 years. This was a much less complicated project than the Mueller investigation - those complaining that Mueller isn't done yet might keep that in mind. barfo
"Lerner was in fact the first official to recognize a problem and try and correct it" Right! This is obviously why she felt the need to take the 5th when questioned about it.
Probably not. Note they didn't say she'd done nothing wrong - they said there wasn't enough to charge her. barfo
Well, Rosenstein is out in about a month anyway, but he probably doesn't want to be fired the day before he retires like McCabe was. barfo
Probably shouldn't have done so much illegal stuff (like, seriously, you know how hard it is to get fired as a government civilian?), but even the FBI has some limits, I guess: And as someone who has recently passed 20 years (and "vested", coin a phrase), there's no sympathy there, either in civilian work or government. At Amazon I saw people let go days before they vested (4 years) the majority of their 6-figure signing bonus. I've seen chiefs with 19 years be forced to leave the service for, among other things, getting too fat. I've seen officers have to leave before 20 for medical reasons who don't get a pension. McCabe didn't get a pension because he did something so egregious that he got fired on the spot. If Rosenstein did, too? Why would you, the taxpayer, want to pay someone for doing their job in a manner that gets them fired for cause?
McCabe did not get fired on the spot. He got fired many months later, and only after a public campaign by the president for his dismissal. Which, no matter what you think of McCabe's actions, is more than a bit unusual. As for Rosenstein, I opined that he probably doesn't want to get fired. Nothing to do with what I want as a taxpayer. barfo
I'll buy that it was unusual, in that it doesn't normally happen. But the President had little to do with it, since he was tweeting about it for months and being held off by Sessions. As soon as the independent IG report and the FBI's OPR report came back saying he committed unauthorized leaks and "lack of candor", Sessions couldn't protect him anymore.
